“The Garda Siochana are to be congratulated . . .” so ran the editorial of the Irish Independent on Thursday, 23rd of July. “The Garda and the courts deserve some commendation . . .” was the Irish Times editorial of the same day. The reason for the plaudits thrown at the boys in blue? Not for charging a corrupt politician or two nor for the mass recovery from their recent spate of colds; rather, it was for a drop in crime figures.

The figures for the six months of 1998 show a 10% drop in reported crime compared to the same period last year. But can the Garda take all the credit for reduced crime? Dr Mick O’Connell, lecturer in Criminal Psychology in Trinity College, points out that there are economic factors behind the drop in figures. “Obviously the police have some effect but economic arguments are important,” he says. “For instance, studies for the Home Office in Britain suggest that economic growth is reflected in a reduction in crime.”

An economic boom may of course help to cut the crime figures, but Dr Paul O’Mahoney – author of Criminal Chaos: Seven Crises In Irish Criminal Justice – says the increase in funding for the methadone programme was important. He points out: “Crime is concentrated in the underclass, people who are not benefiting from the Celtic Tiger at all, unable to gain from the new opportunities – which may perhaps intensify the sense of inequality.”

Obviously tactical decisions by the Gardaí and/or the Department of Justice have some effect on crime levels. But preventing crime is a more complex matter than that. American studies suggest that in the home of zero tolerance, a patrol officer encounters a street robbery once every 14 years. The reason is that street robbery, like burglary, is generally opportunistic. In crime, background is an important factor, and any visit to the courts shows it has a lot to do with poverty and, significantly, drugs.

Last year’s Garda study, Drug related Crime In The Dublin Metropolitan Area, suggested as much of 66% of crime was drug-related. Clearly anything which keeps addicts away from crime will have an effect on crime figures. In Dublin there was a drop of 58% in robberies with syringes or knives and a 19% drop in larcenies from cars, with regard to the previous year’s figures. The main reason for the reduction in crime may be the increase in the availability of methadone. Whatever the benefits (or otherwise) of methadone as a treatment, it takes addicts, as Paul O’Mahoney puts it, “who need to steal to feed their habit” away from crime.

Often what matters most is the public perception of crime. Over the last ten years the figures have remained fairly static. In 1983 there were over 100,000 reported crimes, in 1988: 85,000 in 1993: 95,000, and about 84,000 by the end of this year. But there is a mainly media-fuelled perception that crime is rising and that Ireland is a dangerous place to be. A survey in 1996 found that people believed that crime was on the up and that violent crime was increasing extremely quickly.

Yet there has never been anything resembling a crime wave in Ireland. Compared to our European partners Ireland is full of fairly law-abiding people: we have one of the lowest crime rates in Europe, with one of the highest prison populations. A study in 1993 unearthed a crime rate which is about half that of England or Denmark.

Dr Mick O’Connell says the figures don’t have much effect on the public perception of crime. “Most people get their information from reports of high profile cases involving serious crimes, which make good news stories,” he says. So don’t expect any decrease in banner headlines about crime just because there isn’t that much of it being committed – or for a shrinking in the queue of people talking tough on crime and wanting to take the credit for cutting the figures.